Welcome to the Piano World Piano ForumsOver 2.5 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

Almost everyone has heard recorded acoustic pianos through a variety of sound systems.

The sound heard directly from a contemporary digital piano (meaning, heard in the same room from the external or internal speakers of the digital piano) can get closer to that sound than an acoustic.

I realize this is not what people are expected to understand when thinking about the sounds heard directly from a physical acoustic piano in three-dimensional space (as opposed to recorded, processed and played through a sound system).

Almost everyone has heard recorded acoustic pianos through a variety of sound systems.

The sound heard directly from a contemporary digital piano (meaning, heard in the same room from the external or internal speakers of the digital piano) can get closer to that sound than an acoustic.

I realize this is not what people are expected to understand when thinking about the sounds heard directly from a physical acoustic piano in three-dimensional space (as opposed to recorded, processed and played through a sound system).

My point, for many people their experience of an acoustic piano is limited to recordings. Before I was interested in playing piano I did not absorb the experience when I was around an acoustic piano. My memory was predominantly filled with recorded pianos. The experience of a physical piano is foreign to many people so they have no such reference when evaluating digital pianos. Coupled with the improvements in digital piano technology people are conditioned to accept the digital representation. So to those with hands on experience of acoustic pianos it may seem absurd that people could like digital pianos as much as they often do.

I have yet to find ONE who prefers the digital "piano copy" (did ya like that last bit?)

I think it's about the connection between person and this exquisite thing called a really good piano. The sound is just one component of the experience; it's really a holistic thing, and if you haven't felt that, you need to get yourself to a good piano shop when there is no one around to mar your experience.

Whilst I appreciate my RD700NX, it doesn't come close even to my humble Yamaha U2 upright, in playing enjoyment. A really good DP sounds great and feels pretty good, but ultimately fails the 'connection' test.

o0Ampy0o, you are absolutly right. I am almost never exposed to a good acoustic piano (besides in music stores), so I am mainly biased by what I hear in good quality from CD on my HiFi stereo system. And yes, my digital piano does not only reach to this sound but even tops it, because it much better fills the room (not only stereo, but much more 3D) while having AT LEAST a same beautiful tone.

Then, listening on youtube and sometimes even here in the pianoworld ABF to the many badly tuned acoustics, or listening to an odd acoustic in a music store which costs only the same as a very good digital piano, I of course am absolutly convinced that my digital is better, and thus perfect for me: sounds at least as good as CD recordings, and is better than any eaqually priced acoustic, it is maintenace free and always well tuned and adaptable to any volume I require at a certain day time. So, no reason to ask for more (at the moment :-) ).

"So to those with hands on experience of acoustic pianos it may seem absurd that people could like digital pianos as much as they often do."

True. But they would maintain that people like me and thee haven`t enough hands on experience of the acoustic to appreciate. I would go further. Any piano being heard in an auditorium from a distance would sound nothing like you get sitting at it`s keyboard. Like rattly keys, the pianist swearing, farting . . . sneezing (its bound to happen) Don`t I lower the tone of this forum?

I have played APs for six decades. My current AP is a Kawai RX2 - wonderful instrument, somewhat reduced in enjoyment by the poor acoustics of my room. I have recently bought my first DP, a Kawai ES7. Reasons? May have to downsize and let the RX2 go, portability to play on occasions elsewhere than home, to record some of my repertoire before arthritis/senility/whatever sets in.

I haven't taken it out yet, still have the RX2, but have recorded a few pieces from the ES7 and I know which instrument I prefer for this: the ES7. No background noise, no fiddling with mic positions, no endless tweaking of the sound in Audacity (my mics are bass-light for a start). Just insert a memory stick, press record and hey presto, an MP3 file which just needs amplification and top and tailing in Audacity. I am still getting used to the touch of the ES7 but can contemplate life without the RX2. Yes, the RX2 gives me more, but the difference is much less than I expected. However, if the RX2 were in a larger/warmer room the differences would be more apparent.

I am concentrating on getting used to the ES7, so the RX2 is a bit redundant at the moment, but it will be interesting when I move on to playing either whenever I choose. Meanwhile the ES7 is very satisfying.

Both pianos cost approximately same (the acoustic probably a little bit pricier), soundwise they are very similar (I probably like Yamaha more), the action is better on Yamaha, and it is way more convenient and does not require maintenance (except dust removal :))

Hope this explains why digitals are sold in proportion 75% to 25% to acoustic (not everyone will purchase a grand at double-digit-thousand range).

I can always pick out the sound of a digital vs. acoustic. There was a post on one of these forums once where they had several acoustics and digitals (about 6 in all I think) with the same person, same piece of music, and audio clips only, and we all had to guess which was which instrument. The digital was by far the easiest to pick out. To my ears, it sounds "dead", lacking in depth (this is NOT a criticism of the playing, btw ).

Purchasing a digital is far less a financial investment than a good acoustic, for sure. I recommend digitals to students who are in situations that require for space and sound concerns. But I always recommend getting a good acoustic above all else. Nothing beats the feel and sound - all other things being equal.

Having said that, I do own both. My Roland FP-7 has served me well with outdoor gigs, interim piano while I wait for my Yamaha G3 to be moved to FL from WI, and for fun with making recordings with Ivory. However, I would choose a good acoustic upright over it any day to teach on or play for my own enjoyment.

Ampy, I understand your point (comparing a digital to a recorded acoustic). And I take the opposite view. For me, no digital (not even with a proper sampled piano library) can compare to a properly recorded acoustic piano. Digitals still cannot capture the range, dynamics, and air of an acoustic. So I treat a digital for what it provides: Low cost, low maintenance, and private listening. The rest can only come from an acoustic.

There are a few professionally recorded performances of a high-end (sampled) DP by established classical concert pianists on CD, which I've listened to. Here, it's not a question of inadequate amateur recording on low-resolution YouTube. The results really do sound artificial, and not just because of the looping and lack of various resonances.

_________________________
"I don't play accurately - anyone can play accurately - but I play with wonderful expression. As far as the piano is concerned, sentiment is my forte. I keep science for Life."

There are a few professionally recorded performances of a high-end (sampled) DP by established classical concert pianists on CD, which I've listened to. Here, it's not a question of inadequate amateur recording on low-resolution YouTube. The results really do sound artificial, and not just because of the looping and lack of various resonances.

Interesting. Can you describe what it is that makes it sound artificial to you?

If the recordings are done at the DP speakers then I understand completely. Otherwise I'm not sure what would be the tip-off other than the usual suspects (looping, stretching, too few layers, lack of resonance, etc.).

Almost everyone has heard recorded acoustic pianos through a variety of sound systems.

The sound heard directly from a contemporary digital piano (meaning, heard in the same room from the external or internal speakers of the digital piano) can get closer to that sound than an acoustic. ...

Mmmm. I'm not sure I can agree with that. When I ear a recorded piano there seems to be more "complexity" in the sound. Maybe it's just reverb, but it isn't usually present in digitals.

Marco M - So right! What you hear is what you get. Recordings are the proof. You think like me. My digital sounds wonderful. It cost me Â£425 (it fell of the back of a lorry)

I wouldn't hurry up with your conclusions. If experienced people was able to detect the digital between the acoustics in that test that Morodienne mentioned, it surely means there are differences between acoustics and digitals.

There are a few professionally recorded performances of a high-end (sampled) DP by established classical concert pianists on CD, which I've listened to. Here, it's not a question of inadequate amateur recording on low-resolution YouTube. The results really do sound artificial, and not just because of the looping and lack of various resonances.

Interesting. Can you describe what it is that makes it sound artificial to you?

If the recordings are done at the DP speakers then I understand completely. Otherwise I'm not sure what would be the tip-off other than the usual suspects (looping, stretching, too few layers, lack of resonance, etc.).

I don't know how they were recorded, but I think it's directly from line-out to digital recorder (correct me if I'm not using the proper terminology) rather than via the speakers,because there's no extraneous noise of any sort (key action, pedal action, fingernail clicks on keys etc).

It's the way when the pianist plays louder, the volume increases but is not commensurate with more overtones (sounding 'sharper' or more brilliant) to the same extent. It's as if the volume goes up a lot more than the actual change in the tone that would be expected for this amount of increase in volume - or in other words, like the balance engineer decided to give the pianist a helping hand with his dynamics by turning the volume dial, to save him having to hit the keys much harder. The pianist probably chose the wrong kind of music to play on the DP - a Chopin Etude (Op.25/7) that goes from ppp to fff, with much of the music quite slow-moving and sustained. The other pianist played a slow, sustained Scriabin piece with fewer notes which just makes the looping all the more obvious, but even here, the dynamics also sounded odd.

I played those tracks 'blind' (mixed in with recordings of a real piano) for musician friends, and they also thought there was something artificial and odd about the sound of this piano, but they assumed that it was something the recording engineer did to the recording as I didn't tell them that a digital piano was used on a couple of the pieces.

_________________________
"I don't play accurately - anyone can play accurately - but I play with wonderful expression. As far as the piano is concerned, sentiment is my forte. I keep science for Life."

Of course there are differences. Huge differences. But I prefer to compare a 2500 EUR digital with a 2500 EUR acoustic.

When I could have had hands on acoustics in a store, I decided for myself, that acoustics will become interesting for me only if I could at least spend 8000 EUR for it. Otherwise I better stay with a 2000 - 3000 EUR digital.

Carlos, what you say is correct. But it`s more correct for some pianos than for others. I`m really happy wi my own; to me (probably no one else) it sounded far better than any other digital in the shop. It was also one of the cheapest. It has loads of soul, man! And the second "Grand Piano" on it also has a flat note or two . . . . just for realism, no doubt . .

how does pianoteq + a weighted keyboard + quality speakers sound compared to a grand piano?

Not too good. How does Earth as a planet compare to Venus? I'd say they're worlds apart.

Letting the timbre questions apart (some people says it doesn't sound like a real piano), it has been hypothesized in this forum that the sound dispersion pattern of a speaker is not the same than what a piano has. It's probably true for any sound with some complexity. Has anybody noticed how any non-amplified music that you ear in person sounds different to a recorded one?

I think that's the reason why recent digital instruments pay so much attention to amplification and speakers system and resonators (I'm thinking about AvantGrands specifically, although Roland and kawai also seems to be moving in this direction).

I think that's the reason why recent digital instruments pay so much attention to amplification and speakers system and resonators (I'm thinking about AvantGrands specifically, although Roland and kawai also seems to be moving in this direction).

That's definitely an important line of inquiry, although I still think they need to work even harder on putting full length samples with no looping/stretching, and also work harder on the resonance emulation of real pianos. It doesn't matter what they do with sound systems if they don't improve these basic areas. It's the biggest thing making DPs feel relatively dead compared to an acoustic. I have no doubt it can be done, probably through modelling eventually. I'm sure that if there was an all out effort of NASA proportions, they could eventually produce a DP that could match a large concert grand. It's just that the improvements are so slow and incremental. It's taking forever to get where I want DPs to be. I'd love to be able to buy a DP that can do it all - I'd give up my acoustic if I could. But we are SOOO far away from that. When I was a kid, there were all these promises and speculations about DPs. Now, 25 years later, I'm starting to think I'm going to die before a really great DP is made!

It doesn't matter what they do with sound systems if they don't improve these basic areas. It's the biggest thing making DPs feel relatively dead compared to an acoustic.

When I bought my Clav four years ago I didn't like the sound. I went through several iterations of external sound system, yielding slight improvement, but never satisfying.

This has already been done.

Originally Posted By: ando

I have no doubt it can be done, probably through modelling eventually.

But I think sampling holds more promise than modeling.

This, too, is true.

Originally Posted By: ando

It's just that the improvements are so slow and incremental. It's taking forever to get where I want DPs to be.

But the market is successful even with the current crop of crap. If people buy them and the makers generate profit, they'll continue producing much of the same.

Quote:

I'd love to be able to buy a DP that can do it all ... but we are SOOO far away from that.

Yes ... very far away. But I think the best samplers have reached a point that the tone generator is no longer the red-line limiting factor. Now the sound systems need improvement.

Originally Posted By: ando

When I was a kid, there were all these promises and speculations about DPs.

When I was a kid there were no digital pianos, nor synthesizers, nor any electronic instruments (save for the exotic Theremin, curious but useless). So there were no promises made and no expectations shattered.

Originally Posted By: ando

I'm starting to think I'm going to die before a really great DP is made!

I'm starting to think I'm going to die before a really great DP is made!

You will! And so will I.

That's because you're a pair of cynical old farts! Rejoice, rejoice! NAMM is nearly here. Some nifty new DP is going to blow us all away. If not this year then maybe next. Or the one after that. Probably.

For those who are bitching about the sound, just use a software piano from your laptop plugged into your digital piano by USB. You can have any kind of sound you want.

If you are too cheap and expect a $1000 digital piano to sound like a $100,000 grand piano then are you being unrealistic. Compare a $100,000 grand piano to a $100,000 digital piano and then you can talk.

I'm starting to think I'm going to die before a really great DP is made!

You will! And so will I.

That's because you're a pair of cynical old farts! Rejoice, rejoice! NAMM is nearly here. Some nifty new DP is going to blow us all away. If not this year then maybe next. Or the one after that. Probably.

The sad thing is, I'm not even 40 yet, and I still think I'm going to die before a really great DP is made!

If you are too cheap and expect a $1000 digital piano to sound like a $100,000 grand piano then are you being unrealistic. Compare a $100,000 grand piano to a $100,000 digital piano and then you can talk.

This comment is made time and time again, but it really is a load of bollocks. The whole dollar for dollar comparison is used to make people feel good about their DP. But there is no $100,000 digital piano. And I would say even a $15k acoustic smokes any DP out there. Saying that DPs offer value for money is a totally different argument. They probably do - they are versatile, portable and have lots of features, but this doesn't excuse them from being nowhere near what they claim to be - a real competitor to a decent acoustic piano. In fact, if you prize the playing experience of a good acoustic, a DP doesn't represent good value for money because you won't get the experience you want and need. For acoustic owners, the money you pay is worth it - so this value comparison, and supposed advantage of DPs in this area, breaks down right there.

So let's dispense with the excuse making and talk about them in real terms of playing experience - rather than blurring the comparison with talk of dollars. Is this thread about comparing the two instruments, or comparing our finances?

I have no doubt it can be done, probably through modelling eventually.

But I think sampling holds more promise than modeling.

In the short to medium term, no doubt. I can't help thinking that modelling should theoretically yield better results eventually - especially in terms of integrating the primary notes with the resonance and pedal effects. Of course, this will all happen after we die...

Quote:

But the market is successful even with the current crop of crap. If people buy them and the makers generate profit, they'll continue producing much of the same.

Yes, and the fact that so many noobs are so happy to have a functional piano-like object that they sing from the rooftops about how great their DP is means manufacturers have a low incentive to make things better at a faster rate. I guess that justifies the existence of crappy DPs, but it certainly doesn't settle the argument of how and why DPs fall so far short of acoustics. The problem is that most of the people extolling the virtues of DPs are not experienced enough to even know why acoustics are still so far ahead.

Quote:

But I think the best samplers have reached a point that the tone generator is no longer the red-line limiting factor. Now the sound systems need improvement.

If only we could get some of these samplers in our DPs. I guess it all needs to match up together. No point having one component miles ahead of any other. On the other hand, that might explain the way current DPs are made - everything being adequate but mediocre.